Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I’m watching that too, Chemi, and also Support at the .0038 Weekly Closing of September 20. We have a possible 1-2-3 Bottom on both the Daily and Weekly charts. Question is will #3 be established? Like you say, time will tell.
Don’t shoot! I’m only the messenger!
Mark said this February 20: “Once Lab Proto 3 is far enough along, we plan to hire a dedicated CSpace business development person to continue that work.” He said this March 5: “Since January, I have personally taken charge of all CSpace business development activities.” He said this today: “I will be able to devote more of my time to what I do best: technology commercialization and business development.”
Guys, if you’ll allow me… putting two and two together it seems like LP3 is far enough along that the time has come for him to commercialize this thing… and he’s boasting about it! Oh, and ccb did some great sleuthing today.
Okay, I’m going to turn around now and slowly walk out the door like nothing ever happened. Continue on guys but one last thing… BOOMER SOONER!
In these precarious times we do know this…
CSpace is disruptive technology. Pardon me, I should say… could be disruptive technology if mass-produced. And we know that the University of Oklahoma owns the technology and that they have a Sponsored Research Agreement with 3DIcon with exclusive rights to the technology.
Notwithstanding any strategies previously announced by 3DIcon, can OU terminate its agreement with 3DIcon and renegotiate a similar agreement with a large, established company within the tech industry? Or, is OU/3DIcon a package deal for any buyout proposal? And, how will either of these scenarios impact current shareholders?
Thanks in advance.
“Our current plan calls for us to complete Lab Proto 3 by October of this year and to immediately begin working on the first of three planned Product Platforms.” So says Mark Willner in his June 25th letter to us. He said this also: “I will have more to say about Product Platform 1, once we complete Lab Proto 3.”
Let’s see, October begins this coming Tuesday and so far Mark hasn’t revised his plan – at least he didn’t mention it in his following and last writing to us, September 12. So, will LP3 news be coming Tuesday, October 1? Beats me. And was the market thinking about the possibility and reversed direction in anticipation this week? Again, beats me.
Personally, I think Mark has a responsibility to shareholders’ come Tuesday as to the status of LP3 simply because he hasn’t given notice of a revised plan. Those words said publicly back in June carry a lot of weight.
What say you, Mark?
For you chartists out there…
We haven’t closed above the 5-day SMA since July 31. We closed at it today at .0059.
3DIcon for Sale. That’s a new twist…
What in your opinion would necessitate a buyout relative to current financial and technological conditions? 3DIcon has exclusive CSpace rights by its owner, OU, as you know. What’s in it for OU? And bottom line, what’s in it for shareholders?
Care to speculate? Thanks in advance.
I can’t believe it! Is that who I think it is?
“Well hello .0050! Whatcha doin’ down here? Man, you haven’t changed a bit! I take that back… you look almost the same. So how are you? What you been doin’? Let’s talk!”
“Well you’re not going to believe this, but I’ve been workin’ my azz off and gettin’ nowhere!”
“Really! That’s what you said the last time I saw you! You mean to tell me you’re azzless and you have nothing to show for it?! What’s the problem? Last time I heard you had one heck of a gem dealing in 3D, is that right? Why hasn’t it progressed? What’s the problem?”
“Pretty simple. I can’t find anybody to finance the thing… and I’ve looked everywhere! My little gem has become state-of-the-art, but the public doesn’t believe in the thing or, probably, they just don’t know about it yet. Listen, I’ve even stooped so low as to go to the federal government for handouts because I can’t get this thing off the ground… and get this… they just told me today that I had to partner with one of their lackeys, that they call “big brother” because they can’t, or don’t want to talk to me because they prefer big brother put my foot in their door to explain my gem to them… can you believe it?! Heck! I thought Big Brother WAS the federal government! I guess they despised the name so much that they transferred the label to their minions… And wait till the feminists hear about this! Anyway, I’ve got to find a “big brother” to lay the ground work BEFORE I can talk to the feds and their ARPAs. That’s right, ARPAs. Yeah, there’s seven, eight, ten of them, I don’t know. So that’s where I’m at now with my little gem, and yes, there’s more to the story, but you don’t want to hear it. I’ve said it so many times before… same o’ same o’. And there’s nothing worth mentioning about my flat screen 3D scheme. So there you have it. I’m exhausted. The only thing that keeps me going is that there seems to be no shortage of interest. Yeah, yeah, I know, beats me, too!”
“Listen man, I’ve known you for over eight years now and I know you pretty well, and if this little gem is what you say it is, you’d better get your lackey to kick some doors open and promote this thing to the powers-that-be – and soon! – cut a deal, then, announce it to the world… that’s IF, you don’t want to stay down here! Comprende? Time’s running out on you. Other than that, good luck to you, man.”
Sheesh… government bureaucracy at its best. Poor guy.
Okay, Razor, I took the bait…
From the April 13-14, 2013 OCAST interview:
Gary Owen: This week we’re coming to you from 3DIcon in Tulsa, Oklahoma…
Gary Owen: Let’s talk about applications, because you talked earlier in the show about commercial applications. When we talked we talk a little bit about air traffic controllers as an example, but in your demonstration before we started with the show, you showed us some medical applications. …
So… will we be alright based on the above? You don’t have to answer that but the following did catch my eye while researching the interview.
I noticed a response by Mark concerning 800 million voxels that they can currently generate in, I’m assuming, the laboratory prototype of the time… or was it?
Mark Willner: Okay? And that’s in the first product prototype that we’re building. Beyond that we’re going to be building two billion and four billion voxel (product) prototypes.
“… that we’re building.” Let’s see, “we’re” is the contraction for “we are” which is present tense. Hmmm. Did Mark say something he didn’t mean to say – a slip-of-the-tongue – and wishes he could take it back? Or was it simply “that we’re going to be building in the future” and this is what I really meant to say?
I don’t know, but a government contractor was impressed enough with whatever we had at the time that they agreed to some sort of partnership arrangement that will be announced in the future. That we do know!
Boomer Sooner!
Please allow me to speculate on what we know and what we don’t know…
Mark said that we are putting a partnership arrangement together with a large government contractor and we’ll announce it in the future. He said this in mid-April. Regardless of other possibilities that we’ve heard of as it pertains to capitalizing CSpace, this is the only source – other than our OCAST award – and is through this unannounced partner. OR! Think about it… Mark can’t be trusted! And right now, I have no choice but to believe him explicitly.
No doubt there’s a lot, a lot more to this story than we’ll ever know for sure, but long story short: Mark cut a deal with one of the big four government contractors based on our lab model at the time. No? Why would Mark say something like this in April realizing Lab Proto 3 was still in assembly and not due till October? A CEO doesn’t say something like this publicly unless he can back it up. He knew what he was saying in that studio; he’s no idiot. I rationalize the announcement wait is due to the Z-axis scanner and to what extent it impresses all parties involved. Regardless, whatever we had in April the contractor wanted it too.
The contractor will be announced along with the “arrangement” specifics and following will be an announcement that the Air Force just happens to have some substantial grant money available for 3DIcon’s effort to help build and advise the production of Product Platform 1 along with the contractor. It wouldn’t surprise me that PP2 will be another government contract with different criteria needs, but that’s another story.
In essence, the federal government knows exactly what we have in this disruptive technology – they have for a long time – and they are going to make sure that our little Company and the owner of CSpace are protected. We’re playing the game right now, but it grieves me to say that we’ve been had by the federal government. Private enterprise won’t be allowed until Big Brother says so.
‘Fairy Tale’ you say! Okay, what company in your opinion is going to trump the feds and bailout CSpace?
CSpace is real and it’s not going away and it’s ours… and the feds, for the time being.
Abby, you’re exactly right. I couldn’t have said it better, except for the “small insignificant companies” part, but surely you jest.
I reiterate: The only, I repeat, the only, thing that we DO know – other than Mark’s PR this week – is “we are putting a partnership arrangement together with a large government system integrator who I cannot announce at this point, but we will be able to do that in the future.” I didn’t say that, Mark said that! And the “future” better be in this week’s PR.
CSpace is not going away...
But who really wants it?
We know two things for sure…
We will have an update as soon as Mark gets back from his road trip next week sometime, so says, Judy Keating. The second know is that “we are putting a partnership arrangement together with a large government system integrator who I cannot announce at this point, but we will be able to do that in the future,” so says, Mark Willner.
Given our PPS is in the tank, next week’s PR cannot just be our typical update on CSpace and flat screen progress and how we intend to commercialize it. That won’t get it and will not stabilize the PPS. This update must address viable financing derived from either a government aerospace contractor or partnership with sizeable companies experienced in the digital signage industry.
I hope the time has come for the announcement of the partnership and its arrangement with the government contractor. I think this type PR would pull us out of penny-land doldrums. A subsequent PR announcing ‘Air Force dollars will be forthcoming’ would send us out of the doldrums never to return – but that may be asking too much. Regardless, Mark’s got a lot riding on this next update.
In the interim, I think I’ll find the nearest prie dieu and keep it company this weekend.
Oh, and one last thing…
Mark said this way back on April 13 of this year: “You know, we are looking for funding right now, not only from traditional public market sources, but also from U.S. government sources and we’re putting a partnership arrangement together with a large government system integrator who I cannot announce at this point, but we will be able to do that in the future.”
Hmm… “but we will be able to do that in the future.”
Was the deal cut prior to April 13? And exactly who is this guy, Mark Willner?
My two cents worth…
Dilution is the nature of successful penny stocks… prematurely. Who cares what the product is in the minds of financiers at this stage? Just make a profit and run. And for our financiers at this point in time, the same goes. Yeah, they may think we have something worthwhile just around the corner, but the corner isn’t here yet and they’re thinking “if there’s nothing around that corner like they say there is, I don’t care, I haven’t the time, I’m getting out now with my profit.” And who can blame them? This is the penny stock world and this venue is not their first rodeo! And they are not our federal government that has pockets-full of our hard-earned dollars just dying to give away to the owner of the next discontinuous innovation that assures our military-industrial-complex is maintained and second to none. It’s not their money! Why would they care as long as they have plenty of it to give away?! And they do! Listen, they know what we have in CSpace, but what they don’t know is, yet: does it work? If it does, they design and build their own with our guided expertise. If it doesn’t, they go away with full pockets. Pretty simple.
The corner is October for this penny stock, TDCP. And around that corner better be a worthwhile object called Lab Proto 3 that absolutely must impress, if not, amaze, a number of big-name industries, backed by the Air Force… and one other thing, we better have it protected by then. Because game’s over if Mark and Co. do not have things in order. It’s as simple as that. No? Don’t’ believe me? Where will be the bounce in the PPS? We simply have to have capitalization of our product rather than continued dilution of our stock. There will be no bounce in the PPS if LP3 doesn’t impress by September 30. Game over. The bleachers clear.
But, but, wait a minute, what about our digital signage plans?
In my estimation the only thing that would buy time – maybe, and this is a big maybe – come October, is Prong II… and this is confounding, to say the least. Our flat screen digital signage venture won’t happen unless our partner(s) are dazzled with our new projection concept that, so far is provisionally patented that in essence, secures “patent pending” status. But what concerns me, is financing this venture in a “unique way.” What?! Finance what?! What could this possibly mean? I don’t know, but Mark had this to say: “Now that the Deposit Chill has been lifted, it is our intent to secure the financing necessary to successfully enter the digital signage market as soon as possible.” Again, I don’t know if this will buy us any time with our next month’s volumetric strategy due-date, but this must be good, and if it is, may be our ace-in-the-hole.
So there you have it, my assessment of our little Company to this point. But don’t blame me if you lose your bet! I’m telling it as I see it. And besides, what you’ve just read, I value almost twice as much as what you’ll pay for a share of TDCP.
Outstanding debate! Thank you!
It is my opinion that today’s well-rounded discussion – debate, if you will – offered by Clean, Razor and Abby greatly contributed to the understanding of the ‘current’ situation of our little Company. And yes, I realize there may be more offerings to the discussion, but what we have to this point is of great value.
Below is my edited summary of today’s posts that will enter into my log that I maintain for future reference – and believe me, I will – and is offered for your information.
“Hmm... my guess is somewhere around 60 million (float). Depends on whether the 20 million set aside for management gets sold or kept. My guess is that it will be kept. If sold then the float could be as high as 83 million since about 13 million shares were not in the float as of the end of last year. So my guess is the float is somewhere between 63-83 million shares and nothing to worry about, IMHO!” clean4u #15776
“The float should be in the 80,000,000 range. 0nly 2,000,000 of the 20,000,000 are issued and a part of the outstanding count.” razorback74 #15778
“Thanks razor. I haven't paid as much attention to the share count lately and IMO it really doesn't matter in the long run as I believe the stock is HUGELY undervalued. CSpace alone is worth 1000 times more than currently valued.” clean4u #15779
Actually it (share count) and the pps matters a lot. People used to say that the pps and share count didn't matter way before the reverse split. With a low pps it takes a lot more shares to pay for debt. In time it starts to compound as they continue to borrow and those converting get a cheaper and cheaper conversion rate, until before you know it, it takes 50,000,000 shares to cover a $200K in loans. Every time they sell shares for debt or services, the % of the company you and I own goes down, which in return will hurt our return on investment.
“Anyone that thinks pps and share structure doesn't matter is in for a rude awaking.” razorback74 #15780
“With CSpace proto #3 [LP3] close to completion a deal with someone like a large Government Systems Integrator (Raytheon or Boeing) or a deal with someone to use CSpace for medical imaging would be a deal that addresses 3DIcon’s debt situation. I believe as part of a deal with a large corporation, 3Dicon’s financial situation would immediately look a bit rosier. Anyone partnering with 3DIcon would want as part of a partnership to immediately create a very stable situation for 3DIcon to begin their customer funded work with whoever it might be. That’s a no-brainer and it could happen soon and will. Therefore I have no concerns about 3DIcon’s debt situation which in comparison to what I believe is about to happen is small potatoes.” abbyroad #15781
“If proto #3 were a couple of years off in the future and if the stock had not already undergone a 35:1 reverse split, and if Mark Willner were not the CEO, and had TDCP not received a #1 ranking in the securing of award money for completing [completing? “support the development of”] platform #1, and if TDCP did not have access to the facilities and expertise of the University of Oklahoma, and if TDCP did not have a patented 3D product design that blows away the competition, and if major US aerospace and military entities were not interested in seeing this technology succeed and come into fruition, I would agree with you, razor, however, none of that is the case and since we are but 6 weeks away from proto #3, I submit to you that the number of shares outstanding in ELTP (typo? TDCP) is not that important AT THE CURRENT TIME, and so I agree with Abby's comment! But I understand how what you say could have been and was a concern prior to the 35:1 reverse split last year... but not now under current circumstances!” clean4u #15783
You bet it’s positive… we got it out of the way.
I’m not a bean-counter, but I don’t think it told us anything that we didn’t already know or at least suspect. And I really didn’t think it would trump the next PR.
Ronald’s had his say. What say you, Mark?
HOW HIGH CAN YOU FLY?
Clean, your question reminded me of a song from my younger days.
This waiting game is killing us…
First though, I very much appreciate the acknowledgements and kind words from Pegs, Clonefan and Artsy.
I was just reviewing our correspondence from the office of late and it’s literally a waiting game… and a lot of unanswered questions.
For example, we have two patents pending: one, for our Z-axis scanning system, the other, for the new projection technology for our flat screen digital signage plans. And how’s our joint development agreement going with the world-class optical glass company? LP3 is due by October… and at that time we start implementing not only Product Platform 1, but the modeling of the flat screen projection technology. We wait until sometime in September for half of the OCAST funding and who’s going to partner-up with the other half of PP1? Big mystery! Will the Air Force come in with guns-a-blazing or will Big Brother get back with us “sometime in the near future” with news of SBIR funding? And what’s this “near term revenue” generated by “acquiring small companies in a unique way” for our entry into the digital signage market? What?!
Listen these are ambitious undertakings for our two-prong approach to the digital signage market and our volumetric display strategy. How do we do it? If I knew I would probably have a good shot at becoming our first business development manager.
So in the interim, I’m resolved to patience and with that I have no alternative but to believe in Mark and what he intends to accomplish. We’ll see.
Thank goodness, football season starts August 31. I can’t wait.
BOOMER SOONER!
Big Air! The sky’s the limit…
Our second proposal to OCAST outshone all other contestants and wowed its reviewers. The proposal included multi-paged technical development plans, commercialization plans and also a CSpace revenue forecast. “CSpace revenue forecast!” Sounds intriguing… I’m wowed! (Has nothing to do with today’s record low.) Pretty complete I would say and all this involved the collaboration with key organizations that provided letters of commitment and support. Since the proposal was successful we plan to use the proceeds to fund part of the development cost for our first product platform.
So who wants dibs on our first product platform and fund the other part? And if I remember correctly, it will be the smallest of successively larger prototypes… two billion and four billion voxel platforms come to mind. But, I would think that our supporters would have first dibs… surely.
Let’s see, of those four key organizations committing their support, SRI International is a nonprofit research institute and Advance Research Chemical is a located near Tulsa, and as we know, provides us with our needs and, in my opinion would not have any use for a so-called “product platform” other than to feed it. And it’s been mentioned here previously that the University of Oklahoma’s president has pledged that OU would be home to the leading Radar Meteorology program in the world. That said… OU may need a 3D Doppler ‘product platform’ in its near future, but what about Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems? What does it need, ‘product platform’ wise?
The following are excerpts concerning Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems:
- Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems (SAS) is a major business segment of Raytheon. Headquartered in El Segundo, California, SAS has a total employment of 12,000 and 2010 sales of US$ 4.8 billion.
- SAS is a subcontractor in the development program for the next-generation airborne radar system, the Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program or MP-RTIP.
- The Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program is a U.S. Air Force project led by contractor Northrop Grumman to develop the next generation of airborne air-to-air and air-to-ground radar systems.
- The Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program radar is redefining Air-to-Surface/Air-to-Air Surveillance. A Northrop Grumman – Raytheon team is developing the radar for the U.S. Air Force Electronic Systems Center. MP-RTIP, currently in the system development and demonstration phase, captures the radar systems expertise of both companies under the leadership of Northrop Grumman’s Aerospace Systems Sector.
Enough of that… you get the picture. And no doubt, they need a ‘product platform,’ too. But could Raytheon / Northrop Grumman trump OU? I think OU would make way given that they knew that the Air Force might just pony up a few tens-of-millions of our dollars if it needed come October, if not sooner.
In this R&D world of discontinuous innovation, Mark, making sure we are properly capitalized, had no choice but to go through the military-industrial-complex, if, the above scenario plays out.
Boomer Sooner.
Stormy, just roll with the punches until this dilution plays itself out – and it will with positive news.
Will the price go back up this week? Who knows, but technically, yes, or at least we’d better hope so. The bad news is that we had a new #1 Bottom of the closing price on the weekly chart last week. But the good news is that its relative strength is holding its upward trend line from May of last year. So hopefully, we bottom here with a positive PR from Mark. Needless to say, we’re due and the chart says we’re due. It’s all about ‘positive’ Company news... any other news won’t get it.
And we’re southeast of T-town just across the border in Fort Smith. We’ll be back though.
Boomer Sooner!
No, Stormy, I don’t work for 3DIcon or any of its affiliates or associations. And if I did I don’t think I could legally or at least ethically publish my opinions about the Company. When I use the word “we” I’m referring to myself as being a part of the Company as a shareholder. The Company works for me and has worked for me since May of 2005.
As far as being an insider, I would say no to that possibility also. I’ve introduced myself to Judy Keating and have dropped by the office a few times for my own observations and have from time to time emailed her questioning her on certain things. I met Sid, Victor and others from the Company at the shareholders’ meeting in October 2011, but that’s about it. And hopefully, we’ll have another meeting this fall; we certainly have a lot to talk about.
My wife and I are from Tulsa and now live less than two hours away so we’re familiar with the area. And we are Sooner fans having been raised in Oklahoma and it just so happens that OU owns CSpace, so in that regard that seems to make my feelings for 3DIcon even stronger. I desperately want 3DIcon to succeed and if I can say or do anything to help my Company I will do it.
And thank you for asking.
BOOMER SOONER!
BOOMER SOONER! approximately…
Let’s see, apparently we just had talks with Big Air elites and we may pursue federal funding through SBIR grants. Big Air seems much more attractive considering the amount and timing involved. And coincidentally, we’ve just gone through court proceedings to absolve debt to improve our balance sheet, which may provide greater confidence to future partners and customers as we are told. What I don’t understand and what’s concerning to me is that OU was party to this settlement in the amount of $26,390.64. Again, $26K plus change, folks. But why? What’s the purpose? There has to be an underlying reason for this action by OU. I’m reaching here, but is this a requirement by the Air Force that our balance sheet has to show that no employees, and most certainly the owner of CSpace, not be shown on the debit side of the ledger?
Or maybe all this is just about soothing potential partners and customers concerns, like Mark says... no big deal.
“Tens of millions of dollars” does have a nice ring to it, though.
Settlement Agreement and Stipulation
http://www.agreementworld.com/realdocs/settlement-agreement-and-stipulation-3dicon-corp-rdoivg-d-wm8-2
FORM 8-K
Item 1.01 Entry Into A Material Definitive Agreement
Item 3.02 Unregistered Sale of Equity Securities
On July 26, 2013, the Circuit Court in the 12th Judicial Circuit in and for Sarasota County, Florida (the “Court”), entered an Order Granting Approval of Settlement Agreement (the “Order”) approving, among other things, the fairness of the terms and conditions of an exchange pursuant to Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), in accordance with a Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) between 3DIcon Corporation (the “Company”) and IBC Funds, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (“IBC”), in the matter entitled IBC Funds, LLC v. 3DIcon Corporation, Case No. 2013 CA 5705 NC (the “Action”). IBC commenced the Action against the Company on July 19, 2013 to recover an aggregate of $197,630.64 of past-due accounts payable of the Company, which IBC had purchased from certain vendors of the Company pursuant to the terms of separate claim purchase agreements between IBC and each of such vendors (the “Assigned Accounts”), plus fees and costs (the “Claim”). The Assigned Accounts relate to certain research, technical, development, accounting and legal services. The Order provides for the full and final settlement of the Claim and the Action. The Settlement Agreement became effective and binding upon the Company and IBC upon execution of the Order by the Court on July 26, 2013.
Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement approved by the Order, on July 26, 2013, the Company issued 650,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, $0.0002 par value (the “Common Stock”) as a settlement fee and agreed to issue, in one or more tranches as necessary, that number of shares equal to $197,630.64 upon conversion to Common Stock at a conversion rate equal to 65% of the lowest closing bid price of the Common Stock during the ten trading days prior to the date the conversion is requested by IBC minus $0.002.
The Settlement Agreement provides that in no event shall the number of shares of Common Stock issued to IBC or its designee in connection with the Settlement Agreement, when aggregated with all other shares of Common Stock then beneficially owned by IBC and its affiliates (as calculated pursuant to Section 13(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and the rules and regulations thereunder), result in the beneficial ownership by IBC and its affiliates (as calculated pursuant to Section 13(d) of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder) at any time of more than 9.99% of the Common Stock.
Furthermore, the Settlement Agreement provides that, for so long as IBC or any of its affiliates hold any shares of Common Stock, the Company and its affiliates are prohibited from, among other actions, voting any shares of Common Stock owned or controlled by the Company or its affiliates, or soliciting any proxies or seeking to advise or influence any person with respect to any voting securities of the Company, in favor of: (1) an extraordinary corporate transaction, such as a merger, reorganization or liquidation, involving Company or any of its subsidiaries, (2) a sale or transfer of a material amount of assets of Company or any of its subsidiaries, (3) any material change in the present capitalization or dividend policy of Company, (4) any other material change in Company’s business or corporate structure, (5) a change in Company’s charter, bylaws or instruments corresponding thereto (6) causing a class of securities of the Company to be delisted from a national securities exchange or to cease to be authorized to be quoted in an inter-dealer quotation system of a registered national securities association, (7) causing a class of equity securities of Company to become eligible for termination of registration pursuant to Section 12(g)(4) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (8) terminating the Company’s transfer agent (9) taking any action which would impede the purposes and objects of the Settlement Agreement or (10) taking any action, intention, plan or arrangement similar to any of those enumerated above. These prohibitions may not be modified or waived without further order of the Court.
The issuance of Common Stock to IBC pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement approved by the Order is exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act pursuant to Section 3(a)(10) thereof, as an issuance of securities in exchange for bona fide outstanding claims, where the terms and conditions of such issuance are approved by a court after a hearing upon the fairness of such terms and conditions at which all persons to whom it is proposed to issue securities in such exchange shall have the right to appear.
The foregoing information is a summary of the Settlement Agreement and Order, is not complete, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to the full text of the Settlement Agreement and Order, each of which is attached as an exhibit to this Current Report on Form 8-K. Readers should review each for a complete understanding of the terms and conditions associated with this transaction.
Just an aside…
“… we are looking for funding right now, not only from traditional public market sources, but also from U.S. government sources and we’re putting a partnership arrangement together with a large government system integrator who I cannot announce at this point, but we will be able to do that in the future...” Mark Willner, OCAST interveiw
Here’s a fair definition of “large government system integrator” in my opinion:
Large system integrators quietly lead our country in major government, defense, intelligence and commercial industries including Aerospace, Air and Space Defense, Launch Systems, Military aircraft and sea vessels, Satellites and Weaponry, Intelligence & Surveillance, and Cyber Security. These industries employ hundreds of thousands of people who rely on stable, secure communication and data systems to execute their duties which ultimately protect our nation and our war fighters.
Here are some familiar names, locations and prime contract amounts of 2011’s top twenty:
1 Lockheed Martin Corp. Bethesda, Md. $4,400,891,000
3 Northrop Grumman Corp. Falls Church, Va. $3,088,486,000
7 Raytheon Co. Waltham, Mass. $1,719,415,000
20 Boeing Co. Chicago, Il. $972,108,000
No doubt our military-industrial-complex is feeling no pain, but isn’t this amazing?! Look at those contract amounts… and we’re trying to make our balance sheet look good. What’s got to look good come October is LP3!
Or, on the other hand you can look at it this way: What other R&D companies out there can legitimately say that they are putting a partnership arrangement together with a large government system integrator and are just waiting for the announcement?
Boomer Sooner!
Seems like the 30 SMA has ruled the last month as far as resistance to the closing price. And speaking of closing price, we had a new #1 Bottom yesterday at .0190 on the daily chart. I think it’s evident we need some air support and a company assigned to protect our flank.
“The first customer funded product prototype will be used to secure additional customers and will effectively take the place of the trade show prototype.” Mark Willner, February 20, 2013 letter to shareholders.
Abby, thanks for the clarification. That’s what I get for not remembering that little tidbit of valuable information; I simply forgot it. Had I remembered it, there would not have been any confusion in my mind. Thanks, again.
Okay, what’s next?
Thanks, Clean, excellent analysis.
Okay, Mark tells us that we’ll use the proceeds from the OCAST grant to fund part of PP1. So are you saying, in essence, our first “end user” will financially participate in development costs of PP1? And are we to assume PP1 has effectively replaced Mark’s Trade Show Prototype strategy? Or, are they two separate entities and both remain effective?
Abby, again I agree.
LP3 is due in October, and will overlap the beginnings of Product Platform 1, which will start in September. What’s the relationship here? If we’re advantaged by the show and tell of LP3 what’s the significance, or should I say, purpose, for the development of PP1 and who will it benefit?
Abby, I agree with every word you say.
I’m just trying to figure out which of these developments will get the attention of big money investors and drive the PPS skyward…
Boomer Sooner!
Whatever will be, will be… no doubt.
In my most recent writing I was apparently wrong in my assumption that proceeds from the OCAST grant would help complete Lab Proto 3. In reviewing Mark’s April 23 letter, he states that if the second proposal to OCAST is approved he will “use the proceeds to fund part of the development cost for our first product platform.” My apologies… apparently LP3 is on its own.
In Mark’s latest letter, we plan to build three Product Platforms – each will be the basis for a family of end products. In mid-April he told the OCAST radio audience that the first product prototype would generate around 800 million voxels… and “beyond that we’re going to be building two billion and four billion voxel product prototypes.” Is this not Product Platforms 2 and 3, respectively? I think so.
I can only speculate on how all of this will play out, but since the first of the year Mark’s taken charge of all CSpace business development activity. And with potential players involved that we know about, i.e., OU, SRI, USAF, Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Siemens, et al, I think that says a lot about the man and more importantly, as shareholders, we’re in good hands.
Que sera, sera…
With Tuesday’s letter Mark apparently had a good idea, at least, of OCAST’s approval of our grant proposal to them. We’ll use the proceeds to complete Lab Proto 3 and help fund the first of three so-called Product Platforms with the ‘support’ of the big four: OU, SRI, ARC and Raytheon. How the grant is supplemented, I don’t know. All of this is swell I guess. But!
What happened to application specific prototypes funded by customers? And what happened to this first prototype becoming our Trade Show Prototype? Do we not need these strategies anymore? Do we know of other, more reliable funding where we don’t necessarily have to sell ourselves, so to speak, with our lab model? Apparently now with Product Platform strategy, WE will just build, show, tell and convince… ‘Just tell us what you need depending on our Product Platform and big is not necessarily better…’ Hmmm, this wouldn’t have anything to do with partnership arrangement, would it? Forget I said that.
But that brings the question: Where did our “partnership arrangement” go? There’s no mention of it – is this just simply yesterday’s news? This was one of the first things Mark brought to light in the OCAST interview mid-April.
(Just an aside and before I go any further: I Binged “top optical glass companies” and one’s in Rochester, NY, Sid’s hometown. None were near Tulsa, though.)
The big chill’s been lifted and we’ve begun financing options (like we haven’t tried that approach before). Looks like SBIR grants are up for grabs with the Air Force the best bet to fund our CSpace technology in the tens-of-millions-dollars category. Is this the “large government system integrator” from the Department of Defense that will put together with us a partnership arrangement? Personally, I don’t think so… Mark alluded to best funding source and I can’t imagine partnering our IP with arrangements from Big Air downstreamers. I could be wrong or missing the point.
But I must say this: I don’t believe I’ve seen Mark so content about his volumetric display goals; I think he knows it will take care of itself with time. Building block one’s done and awaits patenting; two’s in good hands.
That said, what’s this verbiage concerning the digital signage industry?
Here we go again. We’ve found some partners, or, we’ll “acquire” them for our advantage to the digital signage industry. We’ve been there before with DTI, but this time, in a unique way that will provide the foundation to enter the market, quickly. I wonder what this means? Does it have anything to do with our new ‘projection technology’ that will reduce costs and complexity of design? Did Mark simply wow select (I like that word) companies to become downstream manufacturing partners with a new way of implementing this technology? Regardless, Mark’s spent a lot of time with companies into the possibility and he seems excited about growth opportunity. Also, it will be interesting to see who’s going to finance flat screen with the chill lifted as he intends.
I think Mark has taken another direction in growing our little Company. In essence, CSpace can wait and will eventually take care of itself. In the interim we’ll concentrate our efforts toward entering the digital signage market. And I substantiate that assumption by his mentioning “near term revenue” not once, but twice while talking flat screen.
Whatever will be, will be.
Excellent analysis.
Okay, what’s next?
Will it be the announcement of our partner? We know that we will have some kind of “partnership arrangement” with a large government system integrator that will provide the foundation for our capitalization… along with federal grants including, more than likely, the OCAST grant. Details of the “arrangements” should be interesting to say the least. And who will benefit most, OU, Boeing, Siemens, 3DIcon?” To me there are no losers in this deal.
Or will it be the announcement of our first application specific prototype (ASP) customer who’s going to fund the build-out of his own prototype, and in the process, donate it to be used as our Trade Show Prototype? Gary Owen and Steve Paris, the OCAST interviewers, saw our lab demonstration using medical applications – apparently derived from CT, MRI or ultrasound – and to me that leaves an impression that Siemens could be our first customer. Taking into consideration that Sid has retired and can say anything he wants to his old colleagues off-the-record – a considerable advantage. I certainly could be wrong. But I really don’t think we’ll hear news of our first ASP customer because LP3 isn’t complete as far as we know.
And what about LP3? Could that be the news – or at least part of the next PR? How advanced is three? Is the color there? What resolution are we looking at now? What about Z-axis progression and did its basis have anything to do with the patenting of our new flat screen projection technology? (Now there’s a story for the future.) And is chemical progression – thanks to Advance Research Chemical in nearby Catoosa – combined with our resolution, progressed enough to sell to potential ASP customers at this time? All things considered, I don’t think we’re there yet. And again, I could be wrong.
But it should be interesting to know in the future who our ASP customers will be. And after this period, will be our most interesting, in my opinion.
Mark told us of his so-called “experiential marketing and product advertising” era. Using his example of being shown high-end jewelry via a tabletop display, I began to imagine what would be required for this? It has to be exceptional, to say the least. But just imagine viewing the image of a diamond on that countertop that its brilliance is so refined that you want to reach in and pick it up. Now that’s fascinating! Will we get there? Yeah, I think so. Our resolution capabilities for the future have been quoted at 400 billion voxels and our chemical supply partner in Catoosa should combine to make possible that diamond image look real. I’m not a scientist, chemist or any other ist but I don’t think I’m wrong on this one.
And where are those Oklahoma oil companies by the way? Where are you Chesapeake, Halliburton, Phillips, et al? You have the captured data, but you need the display! So who gets lucky?
Boomer Sooner!
Newsworthy…
So far, Boeing has provided letters of support for grants that we’ve applied for. They’ve seen the original prototype and wanted us to present LP2 to their management in St. Louis. Lockheed Martin inquired about CSpace through OU. And most recently, Raytheon has come on the scene with a letter of commitment for our OCAST grant proposal.
The 10-Q due tomorrow may shed some light on the cat fight over the licensing of CSpace for ATC operations. That’s fine. But I don’t know if we’ll be able to glean exactly who the “large government system integrator” is until we receive our shareholders’ letter and subsequent 10-K announcing our partner with details of the arrangement… now this will be news!
And when we know, let the good times roll!
Yes, patent it...
Why acquire DTI when you’re fortunate enough and talented enough to experience a state-of-the-art demonstration and invent a less-complex ‘projection technology’ alternative that you can build yourself? That’s apparently what Mark and crew have discovered and will do. But in the interim, and while we’re waiting on our patent, there’s work to be done, namely on Lab Proto 3. And speaking of LP3, Mark apparently was so amazed with the performance of our new Z-axis scanning system that he decided to patent it. Can you imagine how valuable these patents are if tech-savvy people can cruise through a demonstration and patent something more unique?
Our little Company is shaping up and will soon have visitors. And yes, we better tidy-up our demos.
Putting two and two together…
“… we are focused on collaboration with the state of Oklahoma, and in particular with OU, and other organizations within the state.
“… Another area that’s near and dear to the state of Oklahoma is leveraging this great radar technology that’s being developed here in the state for weather forecasting and weather analysis. And that’s both military and commercial. So again, capturing the information in 3D. How many times have we heard on the radio or the TV we’ve got 3D Doppler radar? … Okay, well you’re watching it on a 2D display. Mark Willner (OCAST interview)
Did you know the OU School of Meteorology…
- Is situated in the National Weather Center building.
- Is targeted by President Boren to become, with NOAA, the leading Radar Meteorology program in the world.
- Is known for its severe storms, mesoscale and radar research due, in part, to its location in Oklahoma…
I might add that OU’s president, David Boren, was the former governor and US Senator of Oklahoma… political clout, no doubt.
And let’s see… who is it that owns CSpace?
“… We are talking right now to a company in Catoosa who is a specialty chemical company about being a manufacturing partner for our phosphors. Mark Willner (OCAST interview)
That company is Advance Research Chemicals, Inc. Their facilities are located just north of the small town of Catoosa and just beyond the eastern corporate limits of Tulsa.
Here is an excerpt from their home page…
Advance Research Chemicals, Inc. (ARC) offers customer focused solutions to basic and advanced chemical applications. With global production facilities in the United States, Mexico and India, ARC is known as a reliable resource in the field of specialty chemicals. Many of the world’s largest companies are closely associated with ARC as business partners in the manufacturing of specialty materials for their products. ARC provides custom synthesis, private label manufacturing, research and development, responsive scalability and advanced applications. ARC services a wide array of industries including military defense, semiconductors, battery materials, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, automotive components, textiles, agricultural solutions, surfactants and industrial cleaners.
Our experts in specialty chemicals are dedicated to safety and customer responsiveness. As ARC expands its areas of proficiency and knowledge, our people remain committed to customer-focused solutions.
“… As part of this proposal we have secured letters of commitment and support from key organizations that include:
- The University of Oklahoma
- SRI International
- Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems
- Advance Research Chemicals” Mark Willner (April 23 shareholder letter)
“We want to be the poster child for a successful high-tech venture here in Oklahoma. We want to prove to the world that Oklahoma can do some homegrown high-technology and successfully commercialize that and attract high-tech entrepreneurs like myself, like Dr. Melnik, to Oklahoma to build successful companies.” Mark Willner (OCAST interview)
The only thing that I can add to all of this is… BOOMER SOONER!
“Yes, the plastic ice cube is many times larger, many times more detailed, and much brighter. They look like small glowing blocks made of semi-transparent gems. Forthcoming developments in diamond fabrication processes mean that huge, perfectly transparent blocks of diamond can be made to spec. That means lifelike 3D images projected out of this huge, beautiful diamond block. As an air traffic controller, that's gold. To a military commander, that's gold. To a Gamer, brilliant. To a Drone Operator and Coordinator, it's Standard. To a hardware designer, engineer and mechanical inventor, it's a Necessity.
“CSpace is a paradigm shi[ft].” Mogus
Paradigm shift? Exactly. Here’s proof:
“… Voxel is a 3D pixel and…” Hakki Refai
“Let me jump in and give you some comparison from a consumer perspective. Your standard HDTV, your 1080p TV, that generates about two million pixels. We’re talking about 800 million pixels… that’s in the first product prototype that we’re building. Beyond that we’re going to be building two billion and four billion voxel (product) prototypes.” Mark Willner (OCAST interview)